Apple’s rumored smart display could be a threat to Google Home

Apple, Amazon, and Google are the big three companies in the smart home space. If we’re being honest, though, Amazon’s Echo and Google’s Nest ecosystems have dominated the smart home market for years — Apple’s HomeKit is only loosely relevant because of its first-party integration with iOS. Google’s smart home ecosystem in particular is the complete package, as the brand sells smart speakers, displays, cameras, thermostats, and more.

By comparison, Apple relies on third-party accessory makers for almost everything in the HomeKit ecosystem. That’s about to change, at least in part. According to a report from Bloomberg, Apple is gearing up to launch two variants of a smart display this month. It’s part of a larger home refresh, kicked off with iOS 27, that is said to include a new Apple TV and a HomePod mini, too.

I used Apple Home for years before fully switching to Google Home about a year ago. I know Apple faces an uphill battle if it wants to encroach on Google’s well-established smart home territory. But if Apple does these things with its rumored smart display, Google should be worried.

HomeKit already possesses a smart home advantage most people don’t know about: local control. Google Home, by comparison, handles almost everything through the cloud. Matter, the unified smart home standard, and Thread, the wireless mesh networking protocol, work together to bring local control to Google Home. However, it only works when the Google Home devices you use are compatible with Matter.

Apple takes a different approach. The company’s HomeKit Accessory Protocol requires support for local communication and control. So, whether you’re using a HomeKit-certified accessory or a Matter one, you’re going to get local control with Apple Home. This is in stark contrast to how Google Home operates, as first-party Home and Nest accessories rely entirely on the cloud.

For example, you can’t even set a timer or see the date on a Google Nest Hub or Nest Hub Max display without an active network connection. Google’s Home Speaker won’t tell you the time when the internet drops. The lack of standalone, on-device, and local features is my biggest gripe with Google Home, and it’s one Apple is uniquely positioned to address.

Given Apple’s local control requirement for accessories, I’m hoping its rumored smart display follows the same blueprint. We know internet-based features like Siri and Apple Intelligence will require a network connection. However, if Apple’s smart home hub can control HomeKit and Matter accessories locally without an internet connection, it would have a major advantage over the Nest Hub and Nest Hub Max.

The front-facing camera on Google’s Nest Hub Max is underutilized. It works as a Nest home security camera, can be used for Google Meet calls, and also detects motion — but that’s about it. I own a Nest Hub Max, and I haven’t used the camera once. Google Meet is the limitation. I swear by Google Meet for meetings and briefings, but it’s not a platform I ever use to call my family or friends.

FaceTime, on the other hand, could be Apple’s secret weapon for a smart home display. Per the Bloomberg report, the device is said to feature a front-facing FaceTime camera, microphones, and speakers. The rumored smart home hub has a six-inch display that I imagine will work similarly to an iPad, and FaceTime is sure to be a big part of it.

A smart display that lives in your home and handles video calls sounds like a good idea, but no one has executed it properly. The ill-fated Meta Portal didn’t work out, and I don’t know anyone who uses a Nest Hub Max or Echo Show for video calling. With FaceTime at the core, an Apple smart display could be the product that finally nails it.

Smart displays aren’t known for their sound quality. Google’s Nest Hub and Nest Hub Max have fine speakers, but they’re nothing special. The sound quality of the $99 Google Home Speaker, an audio-focused smart home gadget, didn’t leave me impressed either. In my comparison test, I found that the Home Speaker got louder than Apple’s HomePod mini, while the latter sounded sharper and more detailed. Could the Apple smart display offer the same edge over the Nest Hub and Nest Hub Max?

A sound quality advantage is something Apple needs to shake up the market, but it’s far from a sure thing. The Bloomberg report describes the smart display as having a “metal, round base with multiple rings of perforated speaker holes.” I’m speculating here, but a mesh cover similar to the HomePod would’ve given me more confidence in this device’s audio quality ahead of its expected launch. With a metal base, it’s possible Apple is going for style points instead of the best sound.

It’s also a possibility that Apple wants customers to buy a smart display and a set of HomePods together, sort of like how you can set other speakers as a default audio output for Google Nest displays. We’ll learn more details when this product becomes official. But if Apple gives a smart display the same attention to sound quality it gave HomePods, I’ll be intrigued.

While we’re talking about hardware, it’s worth pointing out there is a Google Home Display in the rumor mill. That said, it doesn’t appear to be as imminent as Apple’s smart display.

Apple’s hardware is proven, but smart home software is less of a sure thing. Even keeping Gemini and Google Home reliability issues top of mind, Siri and Apple Home are more limited. For the smart home display to be a success, HomeKit will need to grow too.

Apple’s iOS 27 update is a good start. It adds Apple Intelligence summaries for smart home notifications and event recordings captured by HomeKit cameras. If this sounds a lot like Gemini descriptions for Nest cameras, which Google has offered for about a year with a Google Home Premium Advanced subscription, it should.

But the HomeKit features aren’t subscription-free either. In fact, there are more requirements. You need a compatible Apple Home hub and an Apple Intelligence-enabled iPhone — that’s an iPhone 15 Pro, iPhone 15 Pro Max, or newer model. Beyond that, you need an iCloud Plus 2TB plan that costs $9.99 per month. This subscription also unlocks HomeKit Secure Video recording for an unlimited number of cameras.

Google’s Home Premium Advanced subscription costs $19.99 per month, and that’s double the cost of Apple’s iCloud Plus 2TB plan. However, I’d argue that Home Premium offers far more value, and works with more devices. Apple should aim to keep most, if not all, of its smart display features free. That’s how it’ll challenge Google.

While we’re on the topic of HomeKit, boy, does Apple need to push accessory partners to get on board. Google sells first-party smart home gadgets in many core categories, like speakers, displays, cameras, thermostats, and sensors. Apple really only has the Apple TV and HomePod lines. The rumored smart display will fill an important hole, but it’s not enough.

I don’t think Apple needs to make a slew of smart home gadgets itself. The fact that you can buy a HomeKit Secure Video camera from Tapo for $50 looks like a perk compared to the $130 cost of Google’s Nest Cam Indoor.

However, there are multiple categories where little or no HomeKit accessories from trusted brands are available. The lack of a reliable, battery-powered HomeKit video doorbell is what pushed me to the Nest ecosystem in the first place.

Apple’s smart display could be the core of a HomeKit-powered smart home. Without quality accessories surrounding it, the utility will be questionable.

Apple might have a long road ahead if it intends to disrupt Google and Amazon’s smart home dominance. It’ll face a few problems trying to get its rumored smart display into homes, specifically justifying what I expect to be a high price and getting HomeKit ready for primetime. I don’t expect to have any qualms with the hardware or build quality, though.

Google’s lackluster hardware and disjointed product lineup provides Apple the exact opening it needs to make noise with its leaked smart display. I don’t trust HomeKit, so I’ll need to see it for myself to believe it. But if Apple does these things, I’ll at least have to think about switching back to Apple Home.